If you lump smartphones, tablets, desktop PC's and enterprise servers all into one category and call them all computers, then sure, that number might be correct. It's just completely insane and useless to do so. Those devices are sold into different markets with completely different usage models and applications. Some of those markets are mature while others are in their infancy. It's rubbish.

If you lump smartphones, tablets, desktop PC's and enterprise servers all into one category and call them all computers, then sure, that number might be correct. It's just completely insane and useless to do so. Those devices are sold into different markets with completely different usage models and applications. Some of those markets are mature while others are in their infancy. It's rubbish.

It is rubbish but likely true. Which is why Windows Phone and Windows 8 on tablet form computers is so important. Android is on many many devices and while they might not be productivity devices, they are consumption devices which Microsoft used to hold the market on. Microsoft need cheap touchscreen tablet PCs to finally succeed. Windows 8 may help them do that where every other recent Windows has failed.

No, they not start at 600 000, but they are receiving all the apps, even Microsoft apps/games... it is very lol...

its a matter of bringing services to platform for microsoft. They are a Hardware and Services<< company you cannot expect them to withhold things that can make them money or convert users outlook, bing, xbox, skydrive, office, sharepoint, lync, groupme, windowsphone, windows, servers, these are all things microsoft makes money on, and while ill agree they should focus on their own users first i dont think apps should be withheld from anyone. exclusivity periods maybe, exclusive aspects of certain apps maybe, but not held from eachother else microsoft is no better than google. Google should stop their childish acts and give their users a choice of what platforms to use, what services to use, if people wanna mix and match services Gmail w/ office etc.. they should have the option to do it.

From a technical perspective, the "just born" argument is a fact that can't be argued with. You can disagree only by being wrong. What you can do is disapprove of Microsoft's strategy.

The next iteration of WP will likely also be "born fresh", but the implications and incompatibilities will be much smaller than they were between WP7 and WP8. MS has good reasons for taking this approach, they just aren't executing fast enough.

WP8 is what WP7 should have been.

Developers follow the money, WP in this moment has more apps than should have given its small market share. There is no chance that WP could compete in apps with iOS or Android, if those platforms return to developers 20 fold income.

Microsoft is now trying a new strategy, WP8 and Windows 8 share the same kernel and many programming interfaces. Microsoft's promise to developers is convergence to a unified platform.
Windows 8 is so big that even with a slow adoption can sell hundreds of millions of licenses, this volume will attract developers. The apps for Windows 8 can be ported to WP at a fraction of the cost, in this stage is more reasonable for Microsoft to invest big money in paying the port to WP. So WP's success is tied to Windows 8 success.

The good news is that both Windows 8 and WP8 are gaining traction, with more devices out there, more apps will come faster.

Other important factor is HTML5, the impact of this technology in the app landscape will be significant. If Microsoft pay money to port applications from iOS to WP, that investment could be lost because for many apps HTML5 will replace native apps and HTML5 apps run on any device. For example, banks, retail, apps that show information, even some games, should go HTML5.

The mobile industry is not consolidated, this is a transition stage, Microsoft can't spend much money if things will change soon.

And like ltyarbro42 said, Microsoft isn't doing it on purpose. They've been paying devs, paying for commercials, paying for Nokia, paying paying paying since day 1. But money spent doesn't always translate into market share.

They aren't doing enough. WP8 has many, many issues that need to be addressed. I know, diminishing returns, but Microsoft needs to get as big a team as feasible to fix as many as possible in a timely manner. Get their updating situation sorted. If they plan on having updates readied on a quick schedule, like Portico, they need to get it rolled out worldwide within a month or two. Pour a tonne of money into internal game development, fix the broken mess that is Xbox Live on Windows Phone. Invest even more in apps, match all the current best sellers on iOS and Android, but also snag the trending services. I know this is controversial, but Microsoft needs to do it when their platform is as small as it is. The chicken and egg problem still exists, there are many apps and services that are not on Windows Phone - or that have left - due to low demand. Solve the chicken and egg problem, and if the platform takes off, paying off developers will no longer be necessary. Oh, and require timely updates and parity with iOS / Android versions as part of app deals.

Advertise the heck out of Windows Phone. Microsoft's advertising spending is nowhere near where it can be. This is a company that spent $6.2 billion on aQuantive for no reason other than panic and $8 billion on Skype, an acquisition that hasn't seen any material ecosystem benefit. Mobile is where Microsoft needs to be right now. It's more important than an advertising platform and it's more important than snagging a (pretty crappy, if I may say so) communication service. How much is Microsoft spending on marketing Windows Phone? A couple hundred million a year? Well, news flash - Samsung spends $4 billion on advertising, and you bet a huge portion of that is promoting their Galaxy brand. Microsoft needs to step up and match that if it wishes Windows Phone to get the penetration that the Galaxy brand has gotten - which is second only to the iPhone.

People seem to forget that IOS has been out for like 6 years now.. Did they start at 600 000 apps?

Back when iOS came out Apps were not the thing smartphones were used for, they were used for email and calling and texting. Apple made apps become a must have feature on a phone. If a OS wants to make it has to have a lot of the main apps right away, and not some half par ones. In my opinion BB10 will rise over WP8 because it has a much more loyal user base and they already have almost as WP8 does now, but they might just be junk apps to. We'll have to wait a see.

It is rubbish but likely true. Which is why Windows Phone and Windows 8 on tablet form computers is so important. Android is on many many devices and while they might not be productivity devices, they are consumption devices which Microsoft used to hold the market on. Microsoft need cheap touchscreen tablet PCs to finally succeed. Windows 8 may help them do that where every other recent Windows has failed.

It is and it isn't. There's a categorical strength and weakness in what Goldman Sachs did. Obviously desktops and phones are not comparable, but someone in the developing world they are massively more likely to own a Windows phone than a Windows desktop. Or laptop. I was raised on Windows PCs, while kids these days are raised on iPads. So yes, they are not alike, but one is replacing the other for many people. Desktops will never be dispensable, but they will be owned at substantially lower rates.

It is and it isn't. There's a categorical strength and weakness in what Goldman Sachs did. Obviously desktops and phones are not comparable, but someone in the developing world they are massively more likely to own a Windows phone than a Windows desktop. Or laptop. I was raised on Windows PCs, while kids these days are raised on iPads. So yes, they are not alike, but one is replacing the other for many people. Desktops will never be dispensable, but they will be owned at substantially lower rates.

I'm not sure why you quoted me, but since you did, I will say I agree with all your statements. The similarities between W8, WRT and WP8 (from a devs point of view) are the main weapon MS will use to fight the app war.

A big push for exclusive games on WP9 will be the other (which I was hoping to see for WP8).

I'm not sure why most people can't grasp that Microsoft is looking at Windows 8 adoption to help boost Windows Phone 8 adoption.

It should be noted that Microsoft's live tiles interface makes some apps a little more difficult to develop, if those apps will have live information. If the user share isn't there, other developers won't develop "live" apps. If the user share IS there, they will (or at least some of them will).

People seem to forget that IOS has been out for like 6 years now.. Did they start at 600 000 apps?

The problem with that logic is that it is like someone selling you a car today which doesn't have AC, a radio, cruise control and saying "Well you forget that cars years ago didn't have those features".

The problem with that logic is that it is like someone selling you a car today which doesn't have AC, a radio, cruise control and saying "Well you forget that cars years ago didn't have those features".

This analogy isn't quite right; it would be if auto manufacturers had to rely on 3rd parties to build and partially install the most of the "applications" in the car, rather than building and installing them themselves.

RIM might be losing day-to-day sales but has a much bigger installed base. RIM could leap frog Microsoft if even half of those users jump to BB10. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that developers are looking to take advantage of new BB10 users. I think early numbers for BB10 will be huge (with most of that coming from corporations upgrading from BB7). The question is, will that growth be sustained?

And like ltyarbro42 said, Microsoft isn't doing it on purpose. They've been paying devs, paying for commercials, paying for Nokia, paying paying paying since day 1. But money spent doesn't always translate into market share.

The BB install base means almost nothing with regards to BB10 as they are fundamentally different OSes with no backward compatibility and are targeted at different markets. Most BBs today are sold in the developing world at low or zero margins ($100 Curve models from 2008) because BBM packages (email, FB, BBM) are more cost-effective than text+Data plans on competing smartphones. Aside from a minority of high income users, BB10 adoption will be close to zero because the phones will be priced in line with high-end Apple and Android phones. BB10 adoption hitting 40 million is basically impossible.

The Galaxy S3 has just hit 40 million after 7 months only because Samsung's distribution power made in available in every single country in the world, and Samsung supported it with advertising in every single one of those markets. A small company like RIM would likely be unable to even produce 40 million BB10 handsets within a year; unlike Samsung, they don't actually operate factories making RAM chips, screens, batteries and SoCs.

What's "likely true"? Lumping smartphones and tablets into the same category as PCs is simply invalid. The whole point of having a category is that a consumer is likely to make a single choice from that category - hence the competition within categories, to get those single sales. A huge majority of people with a tablet and/or smartphone also have a PC.

The Microsoft haters who have recently been trumping the "Microsoft owns so little of the computing device pie!" mantra are plain ridiculous. It's no myth that Microsoft doesn't own a majority of computing devices - when did it? Billions of dumb phones that have sold through the years. (Though I guess those don't count, because they are "dumb" - yet the cheap Android crap that is replacing them are years behind the true smartphone flagships and are most certainly dumb in comparison.)

Would you do the same with TVs and tablets, just because they are both electronics and great for consuming media content?

Originally Posted by aniym

The BB install base means almost nothing with regards to BB10 as they are fundamentally different OSes with no backward compatibility and are targeted at different markets.

BlackBerry's mind share remains as the business phone, and really, compatibility and great enterprise support are what will keep it alive (of course, granted executives see the need to upgrade their departments to touch devices, rather than a traditional BlackBerry form factor). Leaning on that might allow RIM to post decent numbers and perhaps maintain a respectable share of the market, but it will never be enough to compete with the others. The biggest hurdle is that BlackBerry has never really been made to be competitive with consumer smartphone operating systems and I'm hardly confident that the developers are up for it, despite RIM waving around huge app submission numbers.

Microsoft's mistake was skimping out on features such as VPN. Makes absolutely no sense; why bother working on DataSense, which is enabled on about 0.1% of carriers worldwide, rather than VPN? The manager of the Windows Phone team needs to be fired.

App situation is something that will come when WP reaches critical mass. Only thing MS can do is to make dev and publishing part as easy as possible. This is no issue.

To achieve that critical mass...
What i do agree is that WP will need to move much faster. Not impressed at all so far. They are moving like the MS we know, not the MS they should be to even compete against Google and Apple. MS really needs to broaden it's HW support much faster and bring OS updates more often.
Non trackable bar on music player just being one of the many examples that you think it can't take 3 years or how the OS handles MicroSD.